Re: Coronavirus
 

I could be wrong, but his 'data driven' analysis has concerned me about what way he falls for a while now.

As the resident economist I should have opined on his comment about £150bn being injected into the economy. It isn't.

All this money is trying to cling onto is the status quo. There's no need for the markets to react to the status quo. This money costs virtually zero - interest rates are at an all time low. Nobody expects the UK to ever repay it's debts - whether it's £2trn or £4trn is really neither here nor there when interest rates are so low.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Natural herd immunity only works if you let nature 'have at it', i.e. just get on with life and let people catch it. Since thats clearly not going to happen, its pointless anyone going on about it. Instead we are left with these futile attempts to fight nature, which unsurprisingly dont do well, unless we sacrifice everything on the lockdown alter.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The NHS can only just cope as it is - it couldn't cope with an attempt at natural herd immunity, even if such a concept was proven. Hence advocates have been dialling down.
The objctive of lockdowns is to prevent the NHS being overwhelmed and in this respect they work. They're not an alternative to herd immunity derived from a proportion of the population being successfully vaccinated.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Here is an interesting comment on an interesting article about the effects on the poor of CV19 lockdowns.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucele...h=7ee3b380158c

In summary David Nabarro - special envoy WHO commented on the negative affects of lockdowns on the world poor that could lead to a "doubling of world poverty by next year". This was then used to say the WHO says that lockdowns are bad BUT what was really said was the lockdowns should not be the "primary mean" of controlling spread.

It does highlight that nations that have been more successful such as New Zealand (hard lockdown, early - but doesn't also mention low population and geographic isolation that made that easier/shorter) and Tiawan/South Korea with bigger testing and isolation rules (plus more general mask wearing).

It's a good read what I've seen of it and shows how news/comments (both ways) can be taken out of context to support whatever view you want.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Wales came out of their circuit breaker lockdown, in much worse shape than what they went in. Lockdowns don’t work, just wreck the economy and eat in to people’s liberties. Meanwhile suicides are up tenfold.

Re: Coronavirus
 

They won't know for weeks whether its had any effect or not. There's a delayed effect.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Pfizer’s vaccine looks ready to go, with immunity delivered to 90% of recipients.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54873105

2 jabs are required, 3 weeks apart, with immunity established 1 week after the 2nd dose. 43,000 test subjects, no safety concerns raised.

50 million doses by the end of the year, around 1.3bn doses to be produced by the end of 2021.

U.K. gov already has a deal to buy 30 million doses of this particular vaccine.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You know the drill drop your pants you'll only feel a little ....................

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’ll still want to know the side effects of said drug, if any contraindications exist with the medications that I take daily, before that shit gets pumped in to my veins.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Donald Trump has tweeted to welcome the GREAT NEWS of the imminent vaccine.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Stock market is surging.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I don’t blame you, the speed they’ve produced this inevitably means they have less test data than would normally be the case. Hopefully you’re not in too high a risk category for Covid complications so you won’t be under any pressure to be an early recipient.

While I’m by no means medically qualified, I suspect they know enough about the formulation, covid itself (as this vaccine is effectively an inert DNA sample from the virus) and interactions with other drugs in common use to have a reasonable idea where the main risk factors are. The rest I’m sure we’ll learn PDQ if they do manage to give this to more than 0.75bn people by this time next year.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

I think that's relatively normal. Some people just don't get an antibody response to vaccines sometimes.

Re: Coronavirus
 

This is where population level immunity comes in.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Here's a bit of light relief:

Take aim, fire!
:D


Attachment 28669

Re: Coronavirus
 

Easy.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You're taking the piss! :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Giving, shurely?

Re: Coronavirus
 

I will probably hold off, and wait until I enter an "at risk" group.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I've never had a flu jab and can't remember the last time I actually had the flu. One of the benefits of working from home for many years, so I won't be in any rush for this jab.

I'll want to see what crawls out from the woodwork once mass vaccinations start. :erm:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Unless you're a key worker or in an at-risk group it is going to be well into next year before anyone here is offered a covid jab. Plenty of time for population-scale experiments on our elderly citizens and the healthcare workers who look after them. :erm:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Impressive news conference from Downing Street. BoJo sounding his most prime ministerial and on top of his brief for a long time, only faltered a bit when quizzed on Trump.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I didn't watch today but mentioned before he has shifted his tone somewhat. There is less of the energy and turns of phrase and a calmer, more precise and statesmanlike tone has replaced it. I am not sure if this is an intentional shift in image or if it's a consequence of the 2nd lockdown backfiring.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I noticed he didn't wheel out twitty with his BS graphs and prophecies of doom .

Re: Coronavirus
 

Maybe he's softening us up for another "U" turn as in an early end to the lockdown.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And some of us who are volunteering to be on phase-3 COVID vaccine trials...

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes but we may get placebos rather than the vaccine as part the control group. We'll not know until phase 3 is over.

Re: Coronavirus
 

True...

Re: Coronavirus
 

:confused:

Re: Coronavirus
 

It was a good combination of we need to keep going and not slacken our resolve but there's some light at the end of the tunnel. There was the trade mark Boris use of metaphors too once the more serious messages had been put across.

---------- Post added at 00:43 ---------- Previous post was at 00:42 ----------

I think we've seen the last of that particular presentation style. ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Don't celebrate a vaccine yet.

Link

Re: Coronavirus
 

Sorry I meant the way he doubled down on not doing another lockdown before u-turning and doing so. I wonder if he judges his usual optimistic tone would contrast badly with such decisions so has toned it down.

Re: Coronavirus
 

That's good news on the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine from the point that it shows that spike protein vaccines seem to work well and there are plenty of those in the pipeline. The BioNTech vaccine isn't ideal needing two doses and a -80°C cold chain which will be a massive pain but it's a promising start at least.

It looks like this will be made in Germany at least in the first instance by BioNTech itself plus a contract company Rentschler so my German sales colleagues are happy :-)

On another note, we have been having great fun with a sick kid over the last week and have been no stranger to hospitals and it seems that there is a huge variation in COVID security between different hospitals. By far the most secure was Moorfields Eye Hospital childrens unit where you had to resanitise and get a new mask to be allowed walk in the door with security enforcing this. Great Ormond Street Childrens Hospital was next with sanitisation stations on the door with a nice volunteer helping but the feeling was pretty much like entering a supermarket. Our local General Hospital (Watford) was the most lax. Signs everywhere saying wear masks and hand sanitiser stations everywhere like the others but nobody on the door.

This to me seems the opposite of what it should be. If the elderly and immunocompromised are most at risk, I would have hoped Watford would be the most secure while a place where kids with eye problems probably needing the least security..

Re: Coronavirus
 

Any vaccine only prompts the immune system to react as if there was a real version of the virus present. It still takes time for the immune system be able to deal with it. People will still have to self-isolate/be in lockdown for a further 1 or 2 weeks after getting the vaccine. Otherwise in that time they could be exposed to the full real version and suffer from that and spread it to others. Not an instant overnight fix.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I don't know how this vaccine works but typically they kill the virus' ability to reproduce so whether you develop an immune response or not you shouldn't be able to 'get' a virus from it and certainly unable to spread it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Where did I say that?
Just because you have been given the vaccine, doesn't give you instant immunity from the real one still out there. You would still have to self-isolate/shield from that real version that is still out there, whilst your immune system can build an immunity to the fake version that also works on the real version. You would still be vulnerable from getting the real version and it developing to the infectious stage.
Link
Link

It is NOT INSTANT.

Re: Coronavirus
 

This was covered yesterday in the press briefing

The Pfizer mRNA vaccine is deployed at two stages, fourteen days apart. The medical bod who was on the briefing clearly stated that people once they've had the first jab shouldnt be wandering round as if they were immune (even thought there's a level of immunity building) and that they should be just as careful until they have had the second jab (and i think a week after iirc)

Re: Coronavirus
 

They work by giving the immune system a "heads-up" to what it might face in the future. It still takes time for the immune system to build an immunity. It DOESN'T directly and immediately destroy the virus.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes but when they do that they manipulate the virus to ensure it can't replicate otherwise you could kill people by giving them the flu.

---------- Post added at 11:11 ---------- Previous post was at 11:08 ----------

oh sorry I misread your post as saying people would have to isolate because they could spread it. :dunce:

Re: Coronavirus
 

The essential difference between a vaccination and an antiviral drug is that the former stimulates the immune system, while the latter directly attacks the virus, normall by inhibiting its reproduction (although some can act to actively destroy the virus).

Re: Coronavirus
 

It DOESN'T give you immediate protection from the real thing. You could STILL pick that up around the time of vaccination or even afterwards.
You will NOT be able to get the vaccine and then immediately go out and about as if there was no problem at all. Even once the immune system is all prepared for the real thing, it STILL takes time for the immune system to deal with it, although it is quicker in doing it.

In some ways the priorities might be the wrong way around. Vaccinate those most like to spread it around, eg the young, keep them in lockdown for a further 2 weeks. It then should be safer out there for the rest of us to go out and be vaccinated. Having the young face a further 4 weeks in lockdown even with a vaccine, isn't going to work.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Damien needs to rephrase what he is saying. I'm confused.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I misread the post as saying that people who had the vaccine would still need to self-isolate in case they spread it. He actually said because they could still get it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The vaccine would represent the fake version of the virus, the real full version is still out there. You could still get both versions at the same time. You could still be affected by the full version, before any immunity from the fake version kicks in. That would include getting to the infectious stage of the real version, and spreading that real version around.


Lockdown would have to continue for a few weeks, even after vaccinations started.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Seriously?

Re: Coronavirus
 

The old and vulnerable are a smaller group of people so will be easier to systematically vaccinate, although there will be a risk when they go to hospital for it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not sure which of the 3 paragraphs you're referring to.
My priority order question is based upon who is most likely to spread it, and who is most likely to be able to tolerate the continuing lockdown.
Link

That's 5/6 months away.


The shielding and vulnerable groups run into millions. They are not small groups.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes, about 10m people is the figure I've heard. Another reason why natural herd immunity would not work.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Also they can't run as fast if we need to chase them with the vaccine.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I had to go to our local EENT last week (Nottingham QMC) for an eye test, they did the same thing.
I asked them why I had to change mask and they said ive come from outside, it might be "contaminated".

What about the rest of me ?
My shoes, trousers, coat, hair, etc, they are all "contaminated" as well.
Worrying about one small patch of material on my face seems a little strange.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I suppose it would be that you don't breath through those other materials.

Contamination on the mask I guess could have a higher risk of being put into the air, and it's likely to be directed at someone else more than your clothes would be via contact transmission.

Re: Coronavirus
 

My understanding is that the primary use of the masks is to stop those who are infectious from breathing virus particles out (they would probably be caught by a decent mask), although they do apparently help reduce the amount of particles you breath in from other people.

Maybe they are asking people to change masks because they need to reduce the chances of their own staff being infected? That said, the chances are, if you are at an ENT appointment, they are probably going to need you to remove any face coverings anyway.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It might be because a lot of people are using the same mask multiple times without washing it, so they don’t know how long someone has had a mask on - giving people a new mask when they enter minimises that particular challenge.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Seems they are expanding the mass testing ..

Including ;

* Nottingham City
* Nottinghamshire

So it will be interesting to see if we get offered a test.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54885657

Re: Coronavirus
 

The more tests they do the more chance of going into tier 3 after 2 dec and it's bye bye xmas and hello jackboot restrictions again.

Re: Coronavirus
 

That’s a lot of DNA they’re getting...............

Sorry..........takes tinfoil hat off.................

Re: Coronavirus
 

If they are basing things purely on the level of infections, the number of infections per 100,000 should go DOWN. A large proportion of the population will not have been tested and have been behaving themselves, so their test results are more likely to be negative.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Where have they tested 100,000 people to get the figure from?

or did they test 100 and then multiply it up . . . see, this SAGE stuff is easy innit :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

We were already in T3, so thats where we will be after Dec 2nd anyway.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yeah, as others have said, you are actively sucking or blowing virus on to the mask surface depending on whether you have COVID or close to someone else who does so the mask is going to get pretty nasty..

Or another way of thinking - what's dirtier, your floor or your hoover bag after hoovering it? Same amount of dirt but all in one place.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

You could have had it with no symptoms.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just think how far cigarette smoke and the aromas from vaping actually travel. And that's just the detectable distance. The less obvious distance of travel is even further.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Same with a good fart (was gonna say trump but didn't want to start people off).

In fact anything you smell, from whatever distance, means minute particles have traveled . . .

Re: Coronavirus
 

Looking at the first graph on the government’s own website.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths

That doesn’t seem to reflect the government’s and media headlines?

Re: Coronavirus
 

In what way is it different?

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ier-first.html

https://metro.co.uk/2020/10/27/coron...l-uk-13485495/

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...on-b38116.html

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politi...first-22917081

I could go on and on and will if required.

Yet the governments own stats graph on the link I posted show deaths currently plateauing at 30% vs the initial figures in April.

Looks different to me?

Re: Coronavirus
 

The more recent figures are incomplete.
Link

Re: Coronavirus
 

Ok, I’ll leave it a few days.....,,,

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not to sure how this will work.


https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/cl...land-suggests/

Our GP and his Partner are hard pressed to deal with their current ioad so the idea of their having to administer 975 doses a wwk even if they rope in their part-time practice nurse and, even if it is feasible to store these doses at + 2C to -8C, they would still only have a 5 day shelf life.

On a personal note. A neighbour is currently working 12 hour days down in Rugby installing the neccessary freezer compartments in lorries that will be delivering the vaccines. Purpose built and as far as he is aware they have to cope with temps down to -50 which sounds like the vaccines will have started the defrost cycle before they are even delivered. :erm: ... I hope he is mistaken.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Meanwhile, in Sweden...

https://www.ft.com/content/1e0ac31d-...e-eec9744a4d31

Re: Coronavirus
 

It’s all going splendidly.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

It just got real.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-54919497

Re: Coronavirus
 

Terrible!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54897737

Re: Coronavirus
 

Why is there a problem with avoiding an unnecessary delay?

Re: Coronavirus
 

None whatsover. Not the case here, mind.

Re: Coronavirus
 

What delay? At the time they were being asked to release the suits to the NHS they hadn't been verified as being to the NHS standard. When they were they were then released for use.

What would have happened if they'd been released and then failed the test? There was a 50/50 chance that was the case.

Re: Coronavirus
 

How was it not the case? Waiting months for any testing would've been an unnecessary delay. They didn't fail testing, they just hadn't yet been tested.
When on packaging it says "not subjected to animal testing" (or whatever), it doesn't mean it has never been tested on animals, just that somebody else has tested the same or similar formula. There is no reason to expect there to be a problem with any new product based upon older tested similar products.
When products say tested to X, it might well be perfectly ok to use it when exceeding X, just that their testing only went up to X.

---------- Post added at 22:56 ---------- Previous post was at 22:53 ----------

On what basis would they have been likely to fail any test?:rolleyes: Not a complicated design issue.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I don't know. That's why the certification process exists.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The Government had two choices - release it untested and label it as such or get it tested. Labelling something as tested when it isn't hasn't been has lots of downsides.

---------- Post added 13-11-2020 at 00:11 ---------- Previous post was 12-11-2020 at 23:15 ----------

Need to make sure we don't cut our nose off here to spite our face.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-...warns-12130837

Re: Coronavirus
 

Latest crap in our local paper . . . . some snippets:

Right, the bit in bold . . lets go for 'higher than normal temperature, loss of taste & smell, breathing difficulties', they seem a good three to submit.

Is it a nasty bout of Flu or Covid-19? . . . if you've not been tested, you're guessing and screwing the true figures up :mad:

Re: Coronavirus
 

I take part in this survey, and they contact you with further questions if you report those symptoms.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I would've thought the boss of a company suppling a crucial component of the vaccine to be more concerned about getting his product into the EU so that the vaccine can be produced rather than joining project fear.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I read it as he's saying getting the ingredient shipped out of the UK could become harder after January if/when there are border delays. There is then the similar issue of getting any completed vaccine or supporting supplies shipped back into the UK.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So getting a product into the UK is actually sending it out of? Nowhere is exporting the ingredient mentioned.

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.theguardian.com/business...tics-challenge
https://www.brusselstimes.com/news/b...koen-colpaert/

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yeah, sipping the vaccines will be a big pain if it needs an ultra cold chain at -70°C. Normally, you would ship with dry ice to keep the temperatures down but that only lasts so long (the goods my company ship on dry ice, we give 48 hours maximum)

Without invoking the 'B' word, any friction at borders will be a big deal as the clock will be ticking if the trucks are moving or not. You can ship by air but dry ice is classified as dangerous goods due to CO2 being an asphyxiant so IATA limits loads to 200kg per shipment so trucks are without doubt the most effective way to go.

On the subject, if you want to invest some money, might I suggest CO2 suppliers (BOC, Air Products, Air Liquide) They're going to be making some serious money I think

Re: Coronavirus
 

So now you have fallen back on getting the vaccine into the country rather than getting one of the ingredients to produce it out of the country.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Why wouldn't it be possible to fast-track certain items into the country?
It is goods travelling onwards to Ireland that get a bit tricky. How could they be fast-tracked?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Every cloud has a silver lining.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I don't understand what you're getting at?

Croda International are making components of the vaccine in the UK. The vaccine itself is being made out of the UK.

So to get a completed vaccine into the UK, you have to first get the components to make it out of the UK.

The point was that any border delays could affect the vaccine twice, depending on what agreements are in place.

---------- Post added at 11:43 ---------- Previous post was at 11:38 ----------

It does look like the Government are aiming for a specific agreement to cover the vaccine to ensure that any issues in January are mitigated. I hope that works as well as they're saying it will

https://www.cityam.com/coronavirus-g...cine-delivery/

Re: Coronavirus
 

Why would we need EU approval? It's being imported, the rules are for us to set, NOT THEM.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Simple, the boss of a company producing a component of the vaccine warning about "possible" delays getting the vaccine into the country.

Why isn't he more bothered about getting the component his company is producing out of the country so the vaccine can be produced?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not saying it's approval related, but if you have delays to lorries, drivers and other transport related logistics in the UK, then it reduces the availability on the other side of the border as there is only a finite amount of resource available.

Which is why the government is looking at this

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/heal...ys-b68920.html

Re: Coronavirus
 

This ^ ^